Features
Viktor Orban, Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump: The Terrible Threes of the 21st Century
In the autumn of 1956, Hungary staged the first uprising against the 20th century Soviet behemoth. Seventy years later, in the spring of 2026 Hungary has delivered the first electoral thrashing against 21st century right wing populism in Europe. The 1956 uprising was crushed after seven days. But the opposition scored a landslide victory in Hungary’s parliamentary election held on Sunday, April 12 and. Viktor Orban, Prime Minister since 2010 and the architect of what he proudly called “the illiberal state”, was resoundingly defeated. Orban who has been a pain in the neck for the European Union was a close ally of US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Trump even dispatched his Vice President JD Vance to Budapest to campaign for Orban. After Orban’s defeat, Trump and his MAGA followers may be having nightmares about the US midterm elections in November. Similarly, Orban’s defeat has reportedly caused “great concern in the halls of power in Jerusalem.” Netanyahu has lost his only ally in the European Union and the opposition victory in Hungary does not augur well for his own electoral prospects in the Israeli elections due in October.
Ceasefire Hopes
Trump and Netanyahu have bigger things to worry about in the Middle East and among their own political bases. Trump is going bonkers, blasphemously imitating Christ and badmouthing the Pope, launching a blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and strong arming more talks in Islamabad. Netanyahu has been forced to sit on his hands, pausing his fight against Iran while pursuing peace talks with Lebanon. The leaders and diplomats from Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey are shuttling around drumming up support for another round of talks in Islamabad and a prolonged extension of the ceasefire.
Further talks in Islamabad and potential extension of the ceasefire received a new boost by Trump’s announcement of a new 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon. The background to this development appears to be Iran’s insistence on having this secondary ceasefire, and Trump insisting on ceasefire abidance by Hezbollah in return for his ordering Netanyahu to stop his brutal ‘lawn mowing’ in Lebanon. All of this might seem to augur well for a potential extension of the primary ceasefire between the US and Iran. There are also reports of the narrowing of gap between the two parties – involving a potential moratorium on Iran’s uranium enrichment, the opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran’s access to its frozen assets estimated to be $100 billion.
Meanwhile the IMF has released its latest World Economic Outlook with a grim forecast. “Once again, says the report, “the global economy is threatened with being thrown off the course – this time by the outbreak of war in the Middle East.” Before the war, the IMF was expected to upgrade its growth forecasts for the global economy. Now it is going to be weaker growth and higher inflation with oil price optimistically stabilizing around $100 a barrel in 2026 and $75 a barrel in 2027. In a worst case scenario, if the oil prices were to hit $110 in 2026 and $125 in 2027, growth everywhere will further weaken and inflation will go further up in countries big and small.
In a joint statement on the Middle East, the Finance Ministers of the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Sweden, Netherlands, Finland, Spain, Norway, Republic of Ireland, Poland and New Zealand have called on the IMF and World Bank “to provide a coordinated emergency support offer for countries in need, tailored to country circumstances and drawing on the full range and flexibility of their tool kits.” They have also welcomed “advice on domestic responses that are temporary, targeted, and effective, and encourage work to identify steps needed to protect long-term growth.”
Subversion from the Right
The two men, Trump and Netanyahu, who started the war and precipitated the current crisis are not being held accountable by anyone and they are still free to do what they want and as they please. The third man, Victor Orban, who did not have anything to do with the war but extended wholehearted ideological and political support as a faithful apprentice to the two older sorcerers, has been democratically defeated. Together, they formed the terrible threes of the 21st century, spearheading a subversion from the right of the emerging liberal status quo of the post Cold War world. Orban’s defeat is a significant setback to the illiberal right, but it is not the end of it.
The three emerged in the specific historical contexts of their own polities that are both vastly different and yet share powerful ingredients that have proved to be politically potent. The broader context has been the end of the Cold War and the removal of the perceived external threat which opened up the domestic political space in the US, for locking horns over primarily cultural standpoints and climate politics. This era began with the Clinton presidency in 1992 and the election of Barack Obama 16 years later, in 2008, created the illusion of a post-racial America.
In reality, the right was able to push back – first with the younger Bush presidency (2000-2008) pursuing compassionate conservatism, and later with the foray of Trump (2016-2020) threatening to end what he called the “American Carnage.” Of the 32 years since the election of Bill Clinton, Democrats have controlled the White House for 20 years over five presidential terms (Clinton – two, Obama – two, and Biden -one), while the Republicans won three terms (Bush – two, Trump – one) spanning 12 years.
Trump has since won a second term for another four years, but already in his five+ years in office he has issued executive orders to roll back almost all of the liberal advancements in the realms of civil rights, equality, diversity and inclusion. All that the celebrated acronym DEI (Diversity, Equality and Inclusion) stands for has been executively ordered to be banished from the state, its agencies and its programs.
In Europe, the European Union became the champion and bulwark of liberalism and subsidiarity, which in turn provoked the rise of right wing populism in every member country. Brexit was the loudest manifestation against what was considered to be EU’s overreach, but after Britain’s bitter Brexit experience the populists in the European countries gave up on demanding their own exit and limited themselves to fighting the EU from their national bases.
Viktor Orban became the face and voice of anti-EU nationalists. But he and his political party, the Christian Nationalist Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance, are not the only one. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK in Britain and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally Party in France are becoming real electoral contenders, while right wing presidents have been elected in Argentina and Chile.
The rise and fall of Viktor Orban
Of the three terribles, Orban is the youngest but with the longest involvement in politics. Born in 1963, Viktor Orban became a political activist as a 15-year old high schooler, becoming secretary of a Young Communist League local. He continued his activism while studying law in Budapest, visiting Poland and writing his thesis on the Polish Solidarity movement, giving lectures in West Germany and the US as a potential future Hungarian leader, and undertaking research on European civil society at Pembroke College, Oxford.
At the age of 26, Orban gained national prominence with a speech he delivered on June 16, 1989 in Budapest’s Heroes’ Square to mark the reburial of Imre Nagy and other Hungarians killed in the 1956 uprising. Imre Nagy was the leader of the 1956 Hungarian uprising against the puppet Soviet Union outpost in Budapest.
To digress and make a local connection – the pages of Sri Lanka’s parliamentary Hansard of 1956, contain an impressive record of the political debate in Sri Lanka over the events in Hungary. The LSSP’s Colvin R de Silva eloquently led the Trotskyite prosecution of the Soviet invasion of Hungary and the suppression of its freedoms. Pieter Keuneman of the Communist Party used his wit and debating skills to defend the indefensible. GG Ponnambalam, the unrepentant anti-communist, used the opportunity to take swipes on both sides. Finally, for the government, Prime Minister SWRD Bandaranaike deployed his own oratorical skills to empathize with the uprising without condemning the USSR. The four men were Sri Lanka’s foremost verbal gladiators and they used the occasion to put on quite a display of their talents.
Back to Hungary, where Orban began his political vocation identifying himself with Imre Nagy and demanding the withdrawal of the Soviet army from Hungary and calling for free elections in that country to elect a new government. That same year in 1989, Fidesz was recognized as a political party; Orban became its leader four years later in 1993 and led the party and its allies to their first victory and formed a new government in 1998. At age 35 Orban became the second youngest Prime Minister in Hungary’s history.
During his first term, Orban started well on the economy, reducing inflation and the budget deficit, was welcomed to the White House by President George W. Bush, and led Hungary to join NATO overruling Russian objections. But the slide into authoritarianism and corruption was just as quick, including the attempt to replace the two-thirds parliamentary majority requirement by a simple majority. By the end of the term the ruling coalition disintegrated and Orban lost the 2002 election and became the leader of the opposition over the next two terms till 2010.
Orban returned to power with a two-thirds majority in 2010 and immediately introduced a new constitution that set the stage for ushering in the illiberal state. What had been previously a communist state now became a Christian state where ‘traditional values’ of gender rights, sexuality, and exclusive nationalism were constitutionally enshrined. The electoral system was changed reducing the number parliamentarians from 386 to 199 – with 103 of them directly elected and 93 assigned proportionately. Orban went on to win three more elections over 16 years – in 2014, 2018 and 2022 – each with a two-thirds majority, and used the time and power to transform Hungary into a conservative fortress in Europe.
The new constitution and its frequent amendments were used to centralize legislative and executive power, curb civil liberties, restrict freedom of speech and the media, and to weaken the constitutional court and judiciary. It was his opposition to non-white immigration that made him “the talisman of Europe’s mainstream right”. He described immigration as the West’s answer to its declining population and flatly rejected it as a solution for Hungary. Instead, he told his compatriots, “we need Hungarian children.” His ‘Orbanomics’ policies restricted abortion and encouraged family formation – forgiving student debt for female students having or adopting children, life-long tax holiday for women with four or more children, and sponsoring fixed-rate mortgages for married couples.
Orban wanted to make Hungary an “ideological center for … an international conservative movement”. Orban heaped praise on Jair Bolsonaro for making Brazil the best example of a “modern Christian democracy.” He endorsed Trump in every one of Trump’s three presidential elections, the only European leader to do so. In return, Orban has been described by US MAGA ideologue Steve Bannon as “Trump before Trump.” Orban’s attack on universities for being the citadels of liberalism have found their echoes in Trump’s America and Modi’s India.
For all his efforts in making Hungary a conservative ideological centre, Viktor Orban’s undoing came about because of Hungary’s growing economic crises and the depth of corruption and systemic nepotism that engulfed the government. The economy has tanked over the last three years with rising prices and the national debt reaching 75% of the GDP – the highest among East European countries. Orban’s critics have exposed and the people have experienced systemic corruption that enabled the siphoning of public wealth into private accounts, the creation of a ‘neo-feudal capitalist class’, and the enrichment of family and friends. Orban’s corruption became the central plank of the opposition platform that Peter Magyar and his Tisza Party presented to the voters and caused his ouster after 16 years.
The Prime Minister elect is not a dyed in the wool liberal, but a member of a conservative Budapest family, and a politician cut from the old Orban cloth. Magyar (literally meaning “Hungarian”) was once a “powerful insider” in the Fidesz government – notably active in foreign affairs, while his ex-wife was once the Minister of Justice in Orban’s cabinet. Mr. Magyar may not fully roll back all of Orban’s illiberalism, but he has committed himself to eliminating corruption, increasing social welfare spending, limiting the prime ministerial tenure to two terms, and being more pro-European, EU and NATO.
EU and European leaders have openly welcomed the change in Hungary, and may be looking for the new government to change Orban’s vetoing of a number of EU initiatives, especially those involving assistance to Ukraine. In return, the new government in Hungary will be expecting the unfreezing of as much as $33 billion funds that the EU extraordinarily chose to freeze as punishment for Orban’s illiberal initiatives in Hungary. For Trump and Netanyahu, the defeat of Viktor Orban removes their only ally and supporter in all of Europe.
by Rajan Philips
Features
Samarawickrama’s rise gives Sri Lanka a second pillar
Harshitha Samarawickrema was 14 when Sri Lankan women’s cricket first pricked the national consciousness. She had already been playing cricket for her school, Gothami Balika Vidyalaya, but had largely pursued cricket merely for the sake of playing a sport, and also because she had enjoyed watching the men’s team play. But watching Sri Lanka defeat England in a thriller at the 2013 World Cup stirred up a deeper yearning.
“I’d watched all of the matches at that World Cup actually – that was the first time those kind of matches were telecast,” Samarawickrama said once. “That’s when I decided I was going to play and win matches for Sri Lanka one day.”
That victory against England was a new dawn for Sri Lanka’s women for two reasons. First up it was the highest-profile victory on their ledger until then, marking an unexpected high point in a World Cup in which little was generally expected of the team. But it also marked the rocket-powered arrival of Chamari Athapaththu, who top-scored with 62 to help set up the chase.
Thirteen years later, Samarawickrama has not only fulfilled her promise to herself, she has also helped Sri Lanka bring to life the promise of that 2013 campaign. Athapaththu, who has since has become the superstar around which Sri Lanka’s cricket orbits, has never known a more consistent batting collaborator than Samarawickrama. In T20Is, the pair have put on 1,202 runs together – easily the best for Sri Lanka. Though both are lefties who revel in pressure, that’s about where the similarities end – Athapaththu having grown up idolising the big-hitting of Sanath Jayasuriya, while Samarawickrama had been a disciple of the Kumar Sangakkara school of left-handed batting. (Samarawickrama still tries to replicate that famous bent-kneed cover drive, though she invariably sprinkles a little of of her own flair to the endeavour.) Oppositions have found this combination difficult to contend with, Athapaththu commanding through the legside and brutal on errors of length, while Samarawickrama flits around the crease and carves boundaries through cover and point.
It has been clear for years now that Sri Lanka’s chances in pretty much any match depend primarily on Athapaththu runs. But Samarawickrama’s advance as a T20 batter has now opened up a new frontier in the team’s batting performance. Ideally, what Sri Lanka want is not merely big runs from their captain, but a strong partnership between Athapaththu and Samarawickrama. In victories, the Athapaththu-Samarawickrama stand averages 41.38.
More tellingly, a good Samarawickrama innings has become as reliable a predictor of a strong Sri Lanka showing as a good Athapaththu innings. In T20I wins, Athapaththu averages 40.18 and strikes at 131, in comparison to 17.94 and a strike rate of 94 in losses. Samarawickrama’s corresponding numbers are even more stark. In Sri Lanka victories, Samarawickrama averages 44.08 with a strike rate of 109. In losses those numbers are 16.94 and 87. Other Sri Lanka batters have leveled up in recent years too – Kavisha Dilhari, Nilakshika Silva and Hasini Perera having become more frequent contributors, while 20-year-old Vishmi Gunaratne has also showed promise. But 11 years into her international career, Samarawickrama now has a serious body of work.
Samarawickrama had been modest in the shortest format in 2025, but she arrives at the Women’s T20 World Cup 2026 having had a good six months. Against Bangladesh in April, Samarawickrama had cracked 61 off 35, then 49 off 29, in back-to-back matches that Sri Lanka won (Samarawickrama was top-scorer on both occasions). This was in addition to having put up good numbers in the ODI series that preceded the T20Is. Her 36 not out off 34 in a comfortable warm-up win against Netherlands suggests she is still riding on that form.
This is the first T20 World Cup in which serious runs are expected of Samarawickrama, and if history is much to go by, she is not the sort to be daunted by occasion. Samarawickrama’s finest moments as a Sri Lanka cricketer had come in their most-celebrated win of all, in the Asia Cup final of 2024, against India. Typically, that chase of 166 in Dambulla had been propelled by an 87-run Athapaththu-Samarawickrama stand, but when Athapaththu was dismissed, Samarawickrama ensured she remained at the crease until the winning moments, hitting 69 not out off 51, ultimately collecting the Player-of-the-Match award.
If 2013 was a new dawn inspiring a fresh generation of Sri Lanka cricketers, 2024 was the year in which the team hammered its stake into the ground, breaking through into an entirely new galaxy of recognition and acclaim at home. Frequently batting in the shadow of Athapaththu, but always charting her own path, Samarawickrama has grown into a leader.
[Cricinfo]
Features
US’ anti-migrant stance set to intensify tensions in Western camp
The announcement by the US authorities of an anti-migrant stance during a recent commemoration in France of the epochal D-Day Landings of June 6, 1944, ought to strike impartial observers as a supreme irony. Whereas what should have been expected was a vibrant celebration of the beginning of the process of Western Europe freeing itself decisively from Nazi or fascist control during the crucial stages of World War Two, this was not to be.
What the world heard instead was a call to contemporary Western Europe to arm itself against a seemingly rising and threatening migrant presence in the region. In other words, the migrant must be despised and ‘shown the door’.
Instead of a commemoration that rejoiced in the flourishing of liberal democracy and its values what one got was a strong affirmation of fascism and racial chauvinism. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth vented his spleen against the migrant or foreigner presence in Europe reportedly thus: ‘Sadly today different European beaches are stormed by different dangerous ideologies.’ To ‘beaches in Spain and Italy and Greece and Bulgaria, boats and men arrive. When will European capitals do something about that invasion?’
While at the outbreak of World War Two it was Nazi Germany that was doing the invading and bringing some principal European countries under its suzerainty, this time around we are being given to understand that it’s migrants to the West who are seeking to colonize the latter. It goes without saying that such inflammatory rhetoric would have the deleterious effect of keeping racial tensions alive in the West and jeopardize all possibilities of the countries concerned cementing and maintaining social stability.
The Trump administration gives the impression of taking a leaf from the politically underdeveloped regions of the South to keep the US polity stable and united. In South Asia, for instance, we are not short of ambitious demagogues who use what is referred to as the ‘race card’ to gather unto themselves a following and thereby further their political fortunes. By seeking to stir and sustain anti-migrant hysteria, the Trump administration is also essentially replicating Nazi Germany’s policy of anti-Semitism. That is, fascism is very much alive in the US under President Trump.
Such efforts at churning racial hysteria at this juncture in the US should not come as a surprise. For all intents and purposes, the Trump administration is nowhere near achieving its aims in West Asia, for instance, in the short term. It has failed to bring Iran down to its knees, as it hoped to do, but is adopting the expedient of keeping the world guessing and confused on what it is doing in the region, since it cannot withdraw from the theatre in a hurry without losing face.
While perhaps working out an escape strategy the Trump administration it seems, is hoping to maintain its following at home intact and silent by playing on their racial biases and insecurities. Hence, the anti-foreigner campaign.
Simultaneously, the Trump administration will need to keep a close eye on how economic pressures on the domestic front are panning out. Anti-administration sentiments first break to the surface at meal tables. On this score, the news cannot be good because the average US family’s spending power ought to be shrinking on account of rising energy and oil prices. Consequently, it would not be a bad idea to keep the attention of the US consumer diverted by adeptly playing ‘the race card’; once again, lessons from intellectually bankrupt Southern politicians are coming in handy.
To be sure such comparisons many politicians in vibrantly democratic countries would find quite unflattering. But the stark truth is that racism cannot be tolerated in civilized societies and those politicians who resort to it risk being branded as racists of the first degree. In fact they could be seen as being on par with the likes of German dictator Adolph Hitler and his close collaborators.
However, on the question of migrant policy the Trump administration would likely be at polar opposites with the most vibrant of liberal democracies of the West. This will be the case with the UK, France and Italy for instance. The latter continue to keep their doors open to legal migrants and they are likely to view a virtual blanket ban on migrants as reprehensible.
Moreover, in the foremost democracies of the West debates are vibrantly ongoing on the need to keep racism or any hint of it completely outlawed in the public plane. There is the case of the UK, for instance, where the authorities continue to emphatically pinpoint their adherence to the principle of anti-racism in the conduct of public affairs.
One proof of the above was the parliamentary debate relating to the killing of 18-year-old Henry Nowak in Southampton. Police handling of the victim came in for sharp scrutiny by particularly the opposition in the House of Commons but there seemed to be a consensus over the main political divide that the matter should not be politicized.
Moreover, the UK authorities stressed in the House the government’s strict adherence to the policy of non-racism. It was also pointed out that British institutions set up to manage racism at the national, county and neighbourhood levels, for example, were very much intact. In fact, Sri Lanka could gain considerably by studying and implementing locally, legislation modeled on the relevant UK laws if it is in earnest when it speaks of ‘reconciliation’.
Accordingly, it is highly unlikely that Western Europe would ‘cave in’, so to speak, to US pressure on issues related to migration. The liberal democracies of Western Europe in particular would remain for the foreseeable future migrant-welcoming, multi-ethnic and plural democracies.
Nor is it likely that Western Europe would be passively receptive to US demands that it drastically increases its defense spending to meet the latter’s aims. Within the Western fold the EU is remaining committed to backing Ukraine, for instance, in its ongoing armed resistance to the Russian invasion and it is not giving any indication of being deferent to US pressure.
However, although tensions would continue to bristle within US-Western Europe relations on the above and numerous other matters of contention it would be far too premature to announce a parting of company between the two sections of the West. In that sense, the post-World War Two order remains essentially intact. There are still many things in common between the two, particular on the economic plane, that will ensure the continuance of the partnership.
Features
A decade among Yala’s ghosts of gold
The first rays of dawn creep over the ancient rocks of Yala. The Indian Ocean glimmers in the distance, and the wilderness slowly awakens. Somewhere amid the scrub jungle, a pair of amber eyes scans the landscape.
For wildlife conservationist and leopard researcher Milinda Wattegedara, moments such as these have defined more than a decade of dedication to one of Sri Lanka’s most iconic creatures—the Sri Lankan leopard.
What began as fascination evolved into a remarkable conservation journey that has transformed the understanding of Yala’s leopard population and placed Sri Lanka firmly on the global wildlife research map.
“Long before I ever lifted a camera, leopards had already captured my imagination,” says Wattegedara. “What fascinated me was not merely their beauty but the complexity of their lives—their hunting strategies, movements, reproductive behaviour and their remarkable ability to adapt to changing environments.”
That fascination led to the birth of the Yala Leopard Diary in 2013, an ambitious long-term project dedicated to documenting individual leopards and unraveling the mysteries surrounding their lives.
For many visitors, a leopard sighting is a fleeting thrill. For Wattegedara and his team, every encounter is a chapter in an ongoing scientific story.
“Each photograph was never the end of an encounter,” he explains. “It was the beginning of deeper questions. How did a particular leopard use the landscape? How did its behaviour change with the seasons? What environmental pressures shaped its decisions?”
These questions drove years of meticulous fieldwork. Every sighting was carefully recorded with details including location, habitat, behaviour, date and time. Photographs were analysed to identify individual animals through unique spot patterns, allowing researchers to distinguish one leopard from another with remarkable accuracy.
What followed was groundbreaking.

YF77 “Shelly” pauses in quiet observation, embodying the alertness
and grace that define Yala’s leopard population.
From 2013 to 2026, the Yala Leopard Diary identified an astonishing 189 individual leopards within the Yala Block 1. The research revealed a leopard density of approximately 0.524 leopards per square kilometre, making Yala one of the highest leopard-density landscapes ever recorded anywhere in the world.
Such findings have elevated Yala’s status among global wildlife researchers.
Nestled between the Indian Ocean and a mosaic of habitats, ranging from rocky outcrops to dense scrub forests, Yala offers an ecological stage unlike any other.
Here, leopards are photographed silhouetted against ocean horizons, perched atop ancient granite formations, resting on tree branches and stalking prey across sunlit grasslands.
The images tell stories of extraordinary lives.
There is Haminee, a devoted mother navigating the challenges of raising cubs in a competitive landscape. There is Lucas, one of Yala’s most frequently documented males, striding confidently across the Gonalabba Plains with the vast ocean forming an unforgettable backdrop.
There is Ruki demonstrating the species’ incredible strength by hoisting prey onto branches, and Shelly, quietly surveying her surroundings in a moment of feline vigilance.
Together, these individuals have become familiar characters in a living wilderness drama.

YM31 “Ruki” secures prey on a branch, illustrating the remarkable strength and coordination of the Sri Lankan leopard.
Recognising the immense value of long-term documentation, Wattegedara joined forces with fellow researchers Dushyantha Silva, Raveendra Siriwardana and Mevan Piyasena to establish the Yala Leopard Centre in 2020.
Located at the Palatupana entrance to the Yala National Park, the centre is believed to be the world’s first information facility dedicated exclusively to leopards.
“The centre serves as a repository of knowledge, accumulated through years of observation and research,” Wattegedara says. “Our goal is to connect visitors with the science behind conservation and foster a deeper appreciation of these magnificent animals.”
The project’s impact extends far beyond Sri Lanka’s borders.
Research arising from the Yala Leopard Diary has been published in internationally recognised scientific journals. One study introduced an innovative framework for identifying individual leopards, while another documented an extraordinary and previously unrecorded case of a leopard cub being consecutively adopted by two different adult females—first a relative and later an unrelated leopardess.
The discovery attracted international scientific attention and highlighted the complexity of leopard social behaviour.
Yet for Wattegedara, the most important lesson remains one of humility.
“One conclusion has become increasingly clear,” he reflects. “Our understanding of these leopards remains far from complete. We are only beginning to understand how they live, adapt and persist in one of Sri Lanka’s most dynamic protected landscapes.”

YF15 “Hope” descends Rukvila Rock at dawn, showcasing the agility and adaptability of Yala’s leopards.
His words underscore an essential conservation truth: the more we learn about nature, the more mysteries emerge.
As Sri Lanka navigates growing environmental challenges, the Yala Leopard Diary stands as a shining example of what sustained observation, scientific curiosity and public engagement can achieve.
Beyond the stunning photographs and remarkable sightings lies something even more valuable—a growing body of knowledge capable of informing future conservation decisions and ensuring that future generations inherit a wilderness where leopards continue to roam free.
For more than a decade, Wattegedara and his colleagues have followed the tracks of Yala’s elusive predators through dust, rain and scorching heat.
Their work has revealed that every leopard has a story, every sighting has significance and every photograph can contribute to conservation.
And perhaps, most importantly, it has reminded us that the golden ghosts of Yala still have many secrets left to share.
By Ifham Nizam
-
Features7 days agoPower crept into the Sangha and is now tearing it apart
-
Features7 days agoKondachchi wind farm and battery storage project to boost energy security, says Power Ministry Secretary
-
News5 days agoWomen’s T20 World Cup 2026 warm-up: Chamari Athapaththu’s 94 helps Sri Lanka beat Pakistan
-
Features7 days agoSaudi Arabia sets new benchmark in Hajj management as 1.7 million pilgrims complete sacred journey
-
News6 days agoAsst. Manager, security officer arrested over Rs 30 mn snatch at Horana PB branch
-
Editorial4 days agoProbe Sallay’s complaint
-
News5 days agoLankan-Canadian inducted to Toronto Sports Hall of Fame
-
News2 days agoLocal firms move millions of dollars overseas for phantom imports: Govt.
